Alcee Hastings

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the closed rule providing for the consideration of both H.R. 1206, the No Hires for the Delinquent IRS Act, and H.R. 4885, the IRS Oversight While Eliminating Spending Act of 2016. Mr. Speaker, when we began this Congress, we were told that it would be the most open Congress that we have had in our great Nation. The general public does not quite grasp, at least I believe, the significance of rules being closed or rules being open. When there is an open rule for whatever the subject matter is, then every Member of the House of Representatives has an opportunity, if he or she chooses, to make potential amendments to the subject matter that is before the House. My colleagues on the other side have chosen a different tack. I might add, at other times--in my opinion, wrongly-- Democrats have done the same thing, and that is to have closed rules and shut out the rest of the people who may have interesting and necessary proposals with reference to whatever the subject matter is. In this particular instance, we are now numbering, with these two bills, 55 times that we have come here to the floor with closed rules. I bring that to the attention of the general public with an eye toward hoping that there will be some pressure, as there was when I came here, on the majority body to begin to open up this process so that all Members can participate. These bills are nothing more than partisan messaging bills that the majority hopes to use to score cheap political points during the tax season deadline, which was yesterday. H.R. 1206 would freeze hiring at the IRS until the Treasury Secretary certifies that there are no IRS employees with seriously delinquent tax debt. I agree--and I believe Democrats agree-- that IRS employees should pay their taxes. In my view, that is common sense. The good news is that the IRS' department, the Treasury, has the lowest tax delinquency rate--at 1.19 percent--throughout the entire executive branch. So, instead of solving the actual important problems that are facing our Nation, my Republican friends--and the presenter of this measure is my friend--have, apparently, decided it is more important to try and invent problems to solve. There is then H.R. 4885, yet another one of these grab bag proposals that we bring here with more than one rule at a time. This bill would prohibit the IRS from supplementing its annual appropriations funding through user fees, but what it really amounts to is an end-around attempt to cut an additional 4 percent from the IRS' budget. We already cut that budget, rather substantially, previously. Now we seek, under this measure, to cut even more. In other words, the majority often complains that the IRS is not good at its job, and in their wisdom, the answer to this concern is to cut the agency's budget even more and make it harder to hire the people it needs. The IRS is already drastically underfunded and understaffed, so, naturally, my friends on the other side think the solution is to cut more and hire less. This counterintuitive logic is not making the IRS a more successful agency. No. Instead, these proposals will simply make the IRS' already difficult task of enforcing the tax law and serving the American people even more difficult. Mr. Speaker, more importantly, last week, I asked my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Where is the budget? I had the pleasure of working with my friend from Ohio in presenting yet another rule that was going nowhere like this one is. I asked him to have a colloquy with me regarding the budget. I won't bother him with that this week. I am sure that, doubtless, he and I will be back here next week and will be talking about the ongoing negotiations, as he told me last week, on the side of the majority. This week, now that we have blown past the statutorily mandated deadline to pass a budget resolution, through my colleague on the other side and you, Mr. Speaker, I will just ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Where is the budget? Perhaps the American people would like to ask them the same thing: Where is the budget? Mr. Speaker, it is not just the fact that we have no budget; it is the fact that we are not addressing, for example, Puerto Rico's debt crisis, that we are not funding a response to combat the risk posed by the Zika virus. Let me footnote that particular situation. My understanding is that, yesterday, in the Rules Committee, the chairman of the Rules Committee indicated that he thought that there were 20 States that had this problem but that he felt that Texas didn't have the problem. He did assert, with all of the horrible rain and flooding that occurred in certain areas of Texas yesterday, that the residual from that likely will allow, as summer proceeds, for added mosquitos. What has transpired that is little understood by the public is that this matter is now affecting as many as 20 States, according to the chairman. My recollection, from just the news alone, indicates that there may be as many as 33 States in which this pronounced virus has shown up. There are now 80 examples of its having occurred in the State of Florida--7 of them in the congressional district that I am privileged to serve. This particular virus that affects pregnant women and their children is likely to mutate, and scientists signified--the NIH department testified here earlier this week--that this may now be something that we are going to have to look at with adults, who may very well wind up with this problem. If this thing blows up, then we are going to have a crisis in this Nation, and that needs to be addressed right now, not at such time as many people are affected. We can reasonably expect that, with what has occurred, the President has requested nearly $2 billion to address this problem. The Republican majority sent back to the President: take it out of Ebola, and take it out of other areas. The NIH indicates that they would then have to go into other funds, which they are going into, including the fund for tuberculosis. Here again, we have a similar example as to what we have going on here. Rather than addressing a real crisis, we are addressing matters that are going nowhere fast. We are not taking steps to ensure that men and women are paid the same for the same work. We are not working to reform our criminal justice system or our broken immigration system. In fact, under the leadership of this Republican majority, we are not doing much of anything here to solve any of the problems that are facing our country--a broken infrastructure that we have been begging about right here in the Nation's Capital. Aside from all of the potholes, the Memorial Bridge may very well be shut down as well as thousands of bridges in this country; yet we cannot do the things that are vitally necessary that we should be doing in a bipartisan fashion. Mr. Speaker, the Republican Conference's inability to govern means, instead of addressing the many important problems that are facing this great Nation of ours, we are here today, attacking an already underfunded and understaffed agency so that the majority can score political points. Sadly, this has become the status quo with my friends on the other side of the aisle. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. So, then, having cut their budget by 17 percent and then not allowing them to undertake the user fees under the measure that is before us in a manner as you assert to undertake a mandate that they had, do you agree with me that the IRS, under the Affordable Care Act, is mandated to implement that act?

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I ask the chairman if he would remain just a moment to engage in a colloquy with me. Mr. Chairman, with great respect, do you agree with me that, between the years 2010 and 2015, Congress cut the IRS budget by 17 percent?

Mr. HASTINGS. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HASTINGS. I appreciate that very much, Mr. Chairman. Then, for all of our edification, not needing a response unless you care to give one, I said earlier in my remarks that it was less than 2 percent of the delinquencies that occurred in the executive branch, inclusive of the IRS. I don't mean to beat up on staff and Congress people, but congressional employees have less than 6 percent, about 5.8 percent, delinquencies. Now, I am not arguing for delinquencies. But if we are going to go after the IRS, then we might want to take care of our own. I yield to the gentleman from Texas, if he cares to respond.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I am not just talking about Congresspersons, I am talking about throughout the bureaucracy.

Mr. HASTINGS. Yes, I follow you. I don't have a problem with that. I thank the chairman for his forthright commentary. Mr. Speaker, I would advise my colleague from Ohio that I have no further speakers. I think we have made our time deadline of 1:50. So I am ready to close.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up a bill that would ensure that American corporations that enjoy the benefits of operating in our country continue to pay their fair share of taxes by closing the tax inversion loophole. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question and vote ``no'' on the rule and the underlying bills. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank my friend, the gentleman from Ohio, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the rule that is providing for the consideration of both H.R. 3340, the Financial Stability Oversight Council Reform Act, and H.R. 3791, the Raising Consolidated Assets Threshold Under Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement, and for other purposes. These partisan financial services bills, in my opinion, would weaken and politicize the institutions that were created after the financial crisis to identify and guard against systemic risk in our financial system; and they will allow even larger bank holding companies to leverage themselves with debt when financing the purchase of other banks. In reviewing this legislation, I have to ask myself: Are the memories of my Republican friends really so short that they do not remember the pain that our Nation went through only a few short years ago? The financial crisis of 2008, by everybody's statement, was the worst economic downturn that this great Nation has faced since the Great Depression. It left millions out of work and millions out of their homes. Yet, instead of supporting efforts to ensure that a collapse of this magnitude never happens again, the majority has chosen to weaken the very protections that are designed to prevent such a crisis. This is even more appalling when you consider that we are still dealing with the fallout from the crisis. Just this week, Goldman Sachs agreed to pay $5 billion to settle claims that it misled mortgage bond investors during the financial crisis. I was pleased to see that a portion of its repayment is going to go to low-income and moderate-income housing. Mr. Speaker, I guess we really shouldn't be surprised by the actions of my friends in the majority. With the kinds of bills that have come to the floor under this Republican Congress, whether they be to roll back environmental protections, 60-plus repeals of the Affordable Care Act, or to deny access to women's health care, I guess it is not a surprise that now my Republican friends are bringing up legislation to help the big banks and strip away the protections to prevent another financial crisis. I am also left wondering: Why are we debating a rule for these bills today at all? I would like to remind the majority--and I will now and twice again before I yield back my time--that, by law, this body must produce a budget resolution by Friday of this week. Despite this requirement, we still have no budget or a clear path to one. I ask the question: Where is the budget? I pause here to yield to my friend from Ohio if I could get his attention just for a moment. I know the gentleman is on the Committee on Financial Services. We serve together on Rules, but I am not in the majority and am not privy to what may happen this Friday. I am just curious: Since the gentleman is in the majority, what is the gentleman hearing, if anything, regarding our having a budget by this Friday? I yield to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers).

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend's response. I urged that yesterday in the Rules Committee. Aside from your subcommittee holding a hearing this Thursday at 3, we were advised by the chair that there would be no further business of the Rules Committee. So I assumed, if that is the case, that we won't be going back to the Rules Committee. And I am sure that the budget, if it were to be here by Friday, would require a rule. Despite all of these things, I empiricize the fact that it doesn't appear that we will have a budget by Friday. Mr. Speaker, here is how we got to this point: last fall Republicans and Democrats came together to pass a bipartisan budget agreement. Now, however, Republicans are refusing to support their party's own budget proposal. Now, I understand what my friend said about negotiations going on, and that is good. It would be helpful if those negotiations were going on with Democrats in the room as well. I was very optimistic, as I am sure all of us were and, to a relative degree, still are, when Speaker Ryan promised to end Republican obstructionism and return to regular order. I felt very optimistic about that. It seemed that the now-dubbed do-nothing Congress is back and, with it, total dysfunction on the Republican side of the aisle. The dysfunction is so bad that Republicans cannot even agree to a budget number that they have already agreed to. Now, Democrats don't want to weaken the financial protections keeping our economy stable and strong. Instead, Democrats are ready to pass a budget that creates and helps create jobs and grow the paychecks of hardworking Americans. We would like to work in a bipartisan way, and we would assuredly like to work in a way that would bring us to the work that is needed to be done in a positive manner. If only the Republican Conference could stand up to the extreme faction in their own party to work with us, then we could get this business done. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. These financial services bills are not what the American people want. These are bills that big banks want. Instead of debating and passing a budget, which we are required to do by law by the end of this week, as I have said, the majority has decided that we should spend what precious legislative time we have left debating bills that would roll back vital protections to the systemic health of our financial system. So now not only is the dysfunction in the Republican Conference putting one of this institution's most basic functions in jeopardy, which is passing a budget to fund the government, but, to add insult to injury, the majority has decided now is the best time to debate putting our entire financial system in jeopardy by rolling back measures designed to protect it. I might add that there is an appellate decision that is not on this measure, but on another that we dealt with earlier. I don't understand why we are going forward on these measures when we know, in fact, that they aren't going to go anywhere in the other body. Mr. Speaker, in my judgment, the American people deserve better. So since Congress is required to pass a budget by Friday of this week and there is absolutely little sign that the Republican majority intends to fulfill that responsibility, well, Mr. Speaker, I want to give my friends on the other side of the aisle the opportunity to end the obstructionism and meet their and our obligation to pass a budget. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up the Republican budget resolution and allow for the consideration of alternative budget proposals under the same process we use every year. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, to Washington, DC for the Nuclear Security Summit. I have been a supporter of Kazakhstan for many years now, not only in regards to their admirable work in the area of nuclear non-proliferation, but also in advocating for their opportunity to Chair the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)--a position the country attained and served ably in 2010. There are of course myriad reasons to celebrate the strong relationship between the United States and Kazakhstan, but certainly we would all agree that Kazakhstan's work to rid our world of nuclear weapons, and its work to develop safe nuclear power, are foremost among them. Countries like the United States and Kazakhstan come together at Nuclear Security Summits to work toward securing vulnerable nuclear materials, countering nuclear smuggling and thwarting attempts at nuclear terrorism. This is a mission in which Kazakhstan has been a welcomed world leader. Indeed, just four short years after achieving independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Kazakhstan had destroyed all of their nuclear weapons and joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear weapons state. By the year 2000, it had destroyed its nuclear testing infrastructure at Semipalatinsk. Not only has Kazakhstan, under President Nazarbayev's strong leadership, taken the lead in eliminating nuclear weapons, it has also worked tirelessly to create a system in which nuclear energy may be used in a safe, secure and peaceful manner. This was most recently witnessed in Kazakhstan's willingness to host the International Atomic Energy Agency's low-enriched uranium fuel bank. Mr. Speaker, there is no question that our continuing friendship with Kazakhstan is of the utmost importance. President Nazarbayev and the people of Kazakhstan made a principled decision years ago to lead the effort in ridding the world of nuclear weapons. This effort deserves the unqualified praise and support of not only the United States, but the entire international community. Again, I welcome President Nazarbayev to Washington, DC for the Fourth Nuclear Security Summit and wish all involved great success as they work to make our world a safer place for future generations around the world.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the strong and important relationship between the Republic of Turkey and the United States. For years, Turkey has been an indispensable strategic, geopolitical and economic partner of the U.S. Turkey is a significant ally in confronting the challenges of the 21st century, such as international terrorism, ethnic and religious extremism, energy security, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Ankara is a central stakeholder in the ongoing efforts to resolve the Syrian Civil War and aid its victims. I witnessed this firsthand when I visited a refugee camp in Kilis, Turkey. The Turkish government and other surrounding nations have made selfless investments to meet the humanitarian needs of the Syrian people and must be applauded for these efforts. In addition to our strong geopolitical ties, economic cooperation is increasingly becoming a major aspect of the Turkey-U.S. bilateral relationship. Turkey has become an indispensable U.S. trading partner, constituting a large and growing market for United States exports. In 2015, Turkey was identified as Europe's third-fastest growing economy, and its increasing energy demand makes it an appealing market for continued U.S. investment. Mr. Speaker, with the continuing threat of the Islamic State, the uncertainty of the situation in Syria, and an ever increasingly globalized economy it is now more important than ever to reaffirm our commitment to, and cooperation with, the Republic of Turkey. I look forward to strengthening and growing the U.S.-Turkey relationship in the years ahead.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate the rule for H.R. 3716, Ensuring Removal of Terminated Providers from Medicaid and CHIP Act. Among other things, this bill requires State Medicaid and CHIP programs to report providers terminated for reasons of fraud, integrity, or quality to CMS within 21 business days. The requirements in this legislation are straightforward and have achieved broad bipartisan support. I find myself strangely in the position of agreeing with all of what my colleague from Texas had to say. I listened to him intently. So it only leaves the question: Why is this bill being presented here today instead of under the suspension calendar? Rather than taking the time to debate a rule for a bill that could be passed without the need for a special rule, would it not be a better use of this body's valuable legislative time to debate and pass a budget resolution and get the appropriations process started? Mr. Speaker, I applaud Speaker Ryan's promises to end Republican obstruction and dysfunction and return to regular order, but I cannot see how what is unfolding now is a step in that direction. Last fall, Republicans and Democrats came together to pass a bipartisan budget agreement. Now Republicans, appeasing the most extreme fringe of their party, are considering breaking that agreement. Breaking this agreement will not be without consequences for this Nation, including deeper cuts to seniors and working families. Mr. Speaker, the majority's fumble on the budget has ushered in a new level of dysfunction for this institution. My Republican friends' inability to govern has gotten so bad that they can't even agree to follow through on an agreement they have already agreed to and has been signed into law. As we debate today, it is still not clear how the majority plans to move forward on one of this body's most basic constitutional obligations: appropriating funds to run the country. I told the young people working with me that I thought of a metaphor last night about when I first learned to swim. I grew up in an area where there were a lot of lakes, so it was automatic that all of us would learn how to swim, and we did. In learning to swim, among the things that the young boys taught me was there were times when you just tread water, where you don't move forward or backward. If you are backstroking, just tread water. Some learned to float. I didn't. But apparently my Republican friends have learned to float and have learned to tread water because we are not going anywhere fast in this institution of dysfunction. The inability to fulfill this obligation is truly astounding and reveals a Republican majority that may wish upon every star in the sky to return to regular order but has no earthly idea of how to do so. Indeed, the only regularity we see coming out of today's Republican leadership is one dedicated to disorder. The inability to even begin a fruitful discussion of a budget process is but one among many pieces of evidence that prove that the Republican hopes of regular order are as elusive as is their ability to put forth a plan that will benefit working class Americans, strengthen our infrastructure, and provide for the least among us. It would be comical if it were not so dire. Let's recap how we have arrived at this point of Republican inability to govern. For the first time in 40 years, Republicans refuse to even invite a representative from the administration to testify on the President's budget proposal. Then, Republican leaders failed to hold a committee markup on a budget resolution last week and fumbled their plans to present their conference with a promised budget blueprint. Now, in order to appease the insatiable radical fringe of his party, Speaker Ryan is threatening to break the terms of the bipartisan budget agreement passed into law last year--totally unbelievable. Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve better. They want us to work together to fund their government and solve the problems of this country. This whole Republican budget process has shown that the majority and the radical fringe rightwing of their party are simply not up to that task. I might add that I read last night that the majority leader in the other body has made it very clear that he is not going to play along with House Republican functionaries who would send stuff to the Senate that is not going to pass. I predict that we will one day have the usual omnibus at the end of this process, and that is tragic. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers as well, and I am prepared to close. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up a resolution that would require the Republican majority to stop its partisan games and finally hold hearings on the President's budget proposal. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question. Mr. Speaker, the bill underlying this rule institutes a number of proposals that have broad bipartisan support. So again I ask: Why are we here debating a rule for such a bill? Quite obviously, it is because Republicans have no choice but to tread water. In doing so, they have called a time-out on helping the American people; they have called a time-out on doing their job. They have done so so that they may make haste in putting Humpty Dumpty back together again. Good luck, my friends. Truly, truly, I wish you good luck. In the meantime, rest assured that those of us on this side of the aisle stand ready in getting to the people's business once you can pull yourselves together and put forth a budget plan. I am, of course, suspect of whether our friends on the other side of the aisle will be able to do so. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life and legacy of Mrs. Wayedean Beatrice McGraw of Broward County, Florida, who sadly passed away on Friday, January 1, 2016 at age 73. Wayedean was born in Leeds, Alabama where she attended Moton High School. She later moved to Florida where she worked providing private home health care in various locations throughout Broward County. She worshipped at Bethel Baptist and Evergreen Missionary Baptist Church, now known as Greater Providence Baptist Church. Wayedean is survived by her three loving children, Bruce, Annette and Ronald; seven wonderful grandchildren: Cornelius Sr., Valencia, Antwon Sr., Calvin Sr., Marquis, Brittany and Lauren; ten great grandchildren: Roy, Cornelius Jr., D'Naisah, Kristian, Antwon Jr., A'Niyah, Nakyla, Calonni, Calvin Jr., and Makai; one sister, Nancy of Oakland Park, Florida; and many loving nieces, nephews, other relatives and friends. Her mother, Arlene, and four siblings: Jean, Mary, Paul and Charles all preceded her in death. Mr. Speaker, I am truly honored to celebrate the incredible life of Mrs. Wayedean Beatrice McGraw, and express my deepest condolences to her family. I know that her spirit, loving memory, and legacy will always live on.

Mr. HASTINGS

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I thank my friend, the gentleman from Ohio, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss H.R. 3700, the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2015. This bill includes modifications and updates to several existing laws pertaining to housing--and low-income housing, in particular. Many of these changes clarify and improve specific regulations for the benefit of those providing low-income housing and those benefiting from the availability of low-income housing. In fact, this bill improves access to affordable housing for the most vulnerable, such as low-income families and veterans. It is apparent that much work has been involved in finding a balance, and the authors and committee members of both parties are to be commended for their efforts. With that being said, it is important to note that a provision of this bill will effectively raise rents for thousands of families with children and, ultimately, make it more difficult for some low-income parents to maintain employment. The deduction provisions in this bill, as it is currently worded, raise rents for some of the lowest income families in the country. A quarter of households facing rent increases of $25 or more a month are families with children whose childcare deduction would be reduced. I hope that this important issue of childcare deductions will be addressed. My colleague from Ohio just spoke about the work that our colleagues, the chair of this committee and the ranking member, have done to perhaps cause this measure to go forward and not be derailed because of the measure of reducing the childcare deduction for families. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This is an example, in my view, of what can happen here when parties work together. Obviously, on this issue, the Financial Services Committee has done a tremendous job. If we defeat the previous question, I am going to pivot for a moment and offer an amendment to the rule to bring up a bill to help prevent mass shootings by promoting research into the causes of gun violence, making it easier to identify and treat those prone to committing these acts. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous materials, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.